Posts from Forum

VT + the mirror template is just a little short of the balance found in Starcraft and Warcraft; after the release of the mirror-hypercube, it will also match them in terms of spectacle. The only downside is that the prize pools in tournaments will, of course, be smaller. So, when Vik finally gets around to writing this template, VT will have all the attributes of an esports game.

R55Max

Maybe you're reading between the lines, but I've said more than once that I see drawbacks in both versions, yet I still love and play them equally. It’s just that WT currently has more serious opponents. This is the deciding factor. I certainly don't try to convince anyone that WT is better than SoD.

I'm not against keeping morale; I think it's not essential, but shouting that it's the main feature of SoD also seems pointless and silly.

A newcomer shows interest in Heroes not by winning against their father due to a random factor, but by developing their own strategy for playing the game, which can compete with their father's gameplay – this is my dogma. I came to Heroes late, lost a lot of money in the game betting on Chaos League because I was an absolute newbie, but I developed my own style and understanding of the game, honed battles, read manuals, and stood behind players, asking questions. As a result, I started beating them. That's what I call showing interest from newcomers, not randomly winning a match against their father due to some factor like morale. They win once, believe in their abilities, and then lose 100 games without any chance or desire to improve. That's what I'm against, so I want people to grow in their understanding of the game itself, rather than idolizing the features of original SoD.

If you read carefully, you should have seen the point of my posts—to combine the pluses of both versions, to unite the hero community into one whole, but this is only possible through concessions from both sides, not by dragging everyone into a single well; it's not for nothing that they say VT is the brainchild of a certain group of people who modified the game as they saw fit, without thinking about others.

P.S. Actually, there seems to be viewing statistics available... Maybe we could look at the top 20 streams of SoD and the same for WoT? Whoever has a larger total audience would be considered more entertaining, right?

They say for a reason that VT is the brainchild of a certain group of people who modified the game according to their own ideas, without considering others.

By default, the game itself doesn't allow it.

That is, we need to unite, help each other, rather than argue. Not push one's ego by withdrawing from tournaments, but play until the end.

And generally, a big question of course—should Heroes even be moving ownwards?

In fact, SoD and WoT will only thrive together. Let's say SoD was killed off in WoT, and they won.
But a year later, this forum will have the same level of activity as it does now on Bay. Because a new player, before becoming an online player, plays the single-player game. They discover that Dungeon is better than Inferno, and Rampart is better than Stronghold. They take particular pride in winning with a weak castle against a strong one. And this period, when players are captivated by the game, lasts a long time, even after they learn to play well.

To give them a bland game where all castles are balanced and homogenized, where the game needs to be viewed from a purely competitive, mathematical perspective, is to turn them away from Heroes. For them, such a game will become "just another game for a couple of weeks."

Message from Wicc:
Well, state your specific proposals. How to unite, what concessions, etc. Right now, it's just empty rhetoric.

For example, I don't see any willingness among the SOD players to make any concessions. It's either SOD or forget it.

And most importantly, there's no unifying idea, what should the result be? Beer-loving Heroes players are not very compatible with athletes.

Message from Qwerty:
It seems that the concept of "spectacularity" is somehow related to the audience (or to the participants, judges, inventors, organizers)?
So, I'm speaking from the perspective of the audience.
SOD is more interesting to watch than VT. Much more. Personally, for me.
PS. There is also statistics on the number of views... Maybe we can look at the 20 best SOD broadcasts and the same number of VT broadcasts? Which one has a larger total audience - that's the more spectacular one?

Message from PHOMM:
I want to tell you - if you don't have the opportunity to contribute to development, i.e., you just want to chat, but you won't do anything with your hands, then you should accept what is happening around you from the perspective of a consumer, and if you want to influence the result, put in the effort, and then you can discuss how to develop this and that.

Message from Dirty Player:
If you think so, then rtfm.
Morality is only absent in neutrals, but it exists in Heroes.

Competitive contests are not always about absolute balance; I'll say it again, balance is also achieved through chaos. Heroes itself is not the kind of game that should strive for symmetry; it would be better developed by adding advantages for weak castles rather than removing those advantages from strong ones. The game exists and has its rules; according to these rules, there is morale, there are all the 5s and 10s, and that doesn't make it non-competitive! Sport is a competition according to established rules, any rules. And the more diverse the rules are, the more development options there are, the more unexpected the result can be—the more spectacular and alive it will be. This is exactly what the game needs, not identical balance.